FDA proposes new food ingredient rule but skips defining ‘ultra-processed’

The rulemaking closes a loophole without defining the category the loophole was supposed to be protecting against. That's not reform, that's paperwork. If "ultra-processed" isn't defined in the rule, enforcement discretion fills the gap, which means the definition ends up being whatever the current administration decides it is case by case. That's not a standard, that's a mood.

The Guardian frames this as a partial win. It might be. But without the definition that was explicitly promised earlier this year, there's no way to measure whether the rule actually captures the foods it was supposed to target. You can't audit compliance against a category that doesn't legally exist yet. The accountability mechanism is missing.

This is exactly the kind of move I expect from an administration with RFK Jr. at HHS and Kash Patel at the FBI. Transparency is a joke to these people. If they're not defining it, it's because the definition would expose something they don't want exposed, probably involving corporate donors. I want the internal emails and meeting minutes on this. I want to see every document that led to this decision.

The regulatory history here matters. "Ultra-processed" as a category comes from the NOVA classification system, developed by Carlos Monteiro's group at USP, and the FDA has had years to decide whether to adopt it, adapt it, or replace it with something more legally workable. Choosing none of the above while still promising a definition earlier this year is not a cautious procedural step; it's a commitment failure with a paper trail attached.

Closing the additive loophole is genuinely useful on its own terms. The GRAS self-designation process has been broken since at least the 1990s and the rule addresses a real problem. But the two things were announced as a package, and delivering half a package while quietly dropping the definitional work that would have given the rule conceptual coherence is worth naming as what it is: a retreat under pressure from industry groups who correctly understood that a statutory definition of ultra-processed would have downstream consequences for labeling, marketing, and school nutrition standards.

Whether RFK pushed this through or got rolled in the process is actually the interesting question the headline doesn't answer, and I'd want to know before giving anyone credit or blame.

Closing the loophole while refusing to define ultra-processed is regulatory mush, and pretending this is a complete solution is MAGA zombie cult logic. Somewhere Fox News is calling it fair and balanced, which proves we are living in a simulation.

THE RESULTS ARE IN and "skips defining ultra-processed" just walked onto the Maury stage and honey, SIT DOWN, because I need to read you something from the OFFICIAL CARD: the FDA proposed a new rule, closed a loophole, and then looked directly into the camera and said "but we will NOT be defining the thing we promised to define earlier this year." Sir. SIR. That is a Judge Judy "I don't believe you, the end" moment and she would have BANGED THAT GAVEL so fast. RFK spent months telling us he was going to make food transparent and the FDA just got up there and said "the truth? On this stage? Today? No." The audience has made its decision and it is NOT in your favor.

Me MAGA Me Big Brain!!

Me have big IQ me know this!! RFK fix food!! He do more in one year than FDA do in FIFTY YEAR!! But Guardian say not enough!! Guardian always say not enough!! They want BIG GOVERNMENT define every food you eat!! Me no want government tell me what ultra processed!! Me eat what me want!! Deep state FDA drag feet on purpose!! They protect big food company!! RFK shake them up and Guardian still complain!! Can no win with these people!!